Folks,
sorry about the dumb comment, I'll be more mindful in the future.
Anyhow, the arguement for best practices now seems to be, if you have enabled the client side to archive manually, then enable safety copies (to guard against the Jason scenario).
So here's why I have a problem with safety copies. When an item is in safety mode, it sits in pending. When it's in pending you can't forward, reply, or edit the item. For a product who's major strength in the market is that the user's need a minimum of training to deal with it, this hurts. I can't tell you how many environments I've walked in to (hell, I'm in one right now), where users have 30 to 300 pending items "stuck" in their inboxes. Couple that with the fact that most companies don't read the manual and stick the cancel operation button somewhere on the client...and you've got a big problem. I've seen many instances where this has caused many a client to dump KVS (especially 5.0) and go with email Xtender (which is a horrible choice).
So okay, I'm a little biased against safety copies because I tend to be cleaning up after them a lot. And yes, I do realize that there is a scenario where email could technically be lost...but still...it's a really small window comparitively. But still, I'm willing to admit that if a situation exists, a recommendation should be made for safety copies.
But I still don't see a need for safety copies if you don't allow user archives, and have more then a 7 day age based archival strategy.
micah